41 results for 'cat:"Juvenile Law" AND cat:"Sentencing"'.
J. Kitchens finds the trial court erroneously imposed a life sentence without parole after the jury in defendant's murder trial was unable to agree on a sentence. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Miller v. Alabama bars such sentences for juvenile defendants; therefore, the case will be remanded to allow proper sentencing. Reversed.
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court, Judge: Kitchens, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 2023-CT-1381, Categories: Constitution, juvenile Law, sentencing
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Tabor finds that a minimum mandatory sentence of life in prison with the possibility of parole in 50 years was properly imposed after defendant pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, which he committed at age 17, as the lower court performed a thorough analysis before handing down sentence. Affirmed.
Court: Iowa Court Of Appeals, Judge: Tabor, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 22-2079, Categories: juvenile Law, Murder, sentencing
J. Pucinski finds that the lower court improperly denied defendant's pro se postconviction motion challenging his life sentence for aggravated vehicular hijacking. The law does not permit a prior conviction committed before age 21 to be used as a qualifying offense for Class X sentencing. Defendant's case is remanded for resentencing. Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Pucinski, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 211190-B, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing
J. Shanker vacates the trial court's refusal to grant defendant, who was convicted of first-degree murder and other offenses when he was 19 and sentenced to life imprisonment, early release under the Incarceration Reduction Amendment Act. The trial court improperly considered the degree to which the "'hallmark features of youth'" played a role in the crime. Vacated.
Court: DC Court of Appeals, Judge: Shanker, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 22-CO-0650 , Categories: juvenile Law, Murder, sentencing
J. Gallagher finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to separate his assault and murder charges into two trials. The evidence for each of the sets of charges was simple and direct, while the crimes also occurred on separate dates at separate locations, which prevented any chance of confusion by the jury. However, the trial court erroneously failed to consider defendant's age of 17 at the time he committed the offenses, and so defendant's sentence of life in prison with parole eligibility after 63 years will be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing. Affirmed in part.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-467, Categories: juvenile Law, Murder, sentencing
J. Streeter holds that the juvenile court had jurisdiction to modify a juvenile's commitment for attempted murder to a maximum term of confinement of 22-years-to-life. The juvenile court met the requirements for good cause and was making a diligent effort to comply with a new statute. Also, the juvenile's equal protection rights were not violated by the juvenile court's refusal to apply his precommitment credits to his baseline term. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Streeter, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: A166408, Categories: juvenile Law, Murder, sentencing
J. Todd finds that the lower court properly dismissed this case concerning defendant’s sentencing for sodomizing another child when he was 15 years old. Although the juvenile court previously denied defendant his right to be free from compulsory self-incrimination by considering his refusal to admit guilt for the criminal offenses, defendant is not entitled to a new juvenile certification hearing because he is now 27 years old and outside of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction. Affirmed.
Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Judge: Todd, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: J-83-2022, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing, Sex Offender
[Modified.] J. Stewart alters a footnote and denies a rehearing with no change in judgment. The juvenile court had discretion to deny a request to reduce a juvenile's baseline term of confinement who was 14 when he shot and paralyzed a man during a robbery. A ward who follows his rehabilitation plan is not necessarily entitled to a reduction to the baseline term. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Stewart, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: A166850, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing
J. Budd reverses a sentence of life without parole for a defendant convicted of murder. The defendant was 18 when he committed the crime and 18-to-20-year-olds — emerging adults — are more neurologically similar to 17-year-olds than to people age 22 and older. So even though an 18-year-old is an adult, a statute determining that sentencing juveniles to life without parole constitutes cruel and unusual punishment also applies to emerging adults. Vacated.
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court, Judge: Budd, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: SJC-11693, Categories: juvenile Law, Murder, sentencing
J. Stewart finds that the juvenile court had discretion to deny a request to reduce a juvenile's baseline term of confinement who was 14 when he shot and paralyzed a man during a robbery. A ward who follows his rehabilitation plan is not necessarily entitled to a reduction to the baseline term. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Stewart, Filed On: December 28, 2023, Case #: A166850, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing
J. Pritzker finds that the lower court properly declined to adjudicate defendant as a youthful offender after he pleaded guilty to burglary. That defendant was 18 years old at the time and had been placed in foster care at an early age due to parental neglect did not overcome his history of serious and violent crimes, including multiple burglaries. However, the sentence on one of two counts in defendant's conviction should be reduced in the interest of justice. Affirmed.s
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Pritzker, Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: 112252, Categories: Burglary, juvenile Law, sentencing
J. Gratton finds that the juvenile defendant's 15-year sentence with 11 years determinate for attempted rape was supported by substantial evidence. His violent, unprovoked and opportunistic crime combined with a presentence investigation report, a psychosexual evaluation, and documents from multiple other psychiatric evaluations show that he presents an extraordinarily high risk of reoffending. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gratton, Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: 49994, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing, Sex Offender
J. Badding finds that defendant was properly sentenced to prison after pleading guilty to intimidation with a dangerous weapon for taking part in a fatal drive-by shooting at the age of 16 because incarceration would protect the public and provide defendant an opportunity for rehabilitation. Affirmed.
Court: Iowa Court Of Appeals, Judge: Badding, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 22-1987, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing, Weapons
J. Jones finds that defendant was improperly denied parole after he was charged with robbery and wanton endangerment as a juvenile for putting a gun to a man's head and stealing his money. Defendant, who was convicted of a lesser crime, had already been sentenced as a juvenile, and the trial court had no authority to resentence him as an adult offender.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Jones, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 2022-CA-0436-MR, Categories: juvenile Law, Robbery, sentencing
J. Cassel finds the district court properly dismissed this suit brought by the prison inmate regarding the computation of her tentative mandatory release date. The court sentenced defendant to life for a murder committed as a juvenile, imposing a consecutive sentence of two to five years for a firearm use conviction. Later, the court imposed a consecutive sentence of one year for assault by a confined person. The murder sentence was vacated following a decision involving juvenile offenders and changed to 60 to 80 years. The inmate’s complaint, challenging confinement duration, fails to state a claim. Also, in failing to challenge the validity of a rule, the sovereign immunity waiver does not apply. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Cassel, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: S-22-719, Categories: juvenile Law, Murder, sentencing
J. Mathis finds the trial court properly imposed an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act after defendant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. His previous juvenile conviction for possession of a firearm while committing second-degree murder qualifies as a crime of violence under the Act. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Mathis, Filed On: October 26, 2023, Case #: 22-1840, Categories: Firearms, juvenile Law, sentencing
J. Pritzker finds that the lower court improperly sentenced defendant for assault without making a determination on youthful offender eligibility, which defendant requested in the interest of justice. However, remittal is more appropriate since the discussion had not occurred before the sentencing court. Defendant's harsh sentence claims should be dismissed as academic. Vacated.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Pritzker, Filed On: September 21, 2023, Case #: 106889B, Categories: juvenile Law, sentencing, Assault